Kindergartens w/small class sizes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Secondly, once you get under 15 kids or so, especially with multiple teachers, you are likely looking at a classroom with a high percentage of special needs learners, meaning either your child is being looked at as perhaps needing additional support and/or will be competing for time with higher needs students. That is not to say that there aren't benefits to being in an inclusion classroom, but know what you're getting in to.

This makes no sense to me. If classes are small by school policy/design what would make you think that it is a room full of special needs children? The question is not what it means if your child is placed in a smaller class, but which schools have small classes on purpose at the K level.

[Anonymous]

Teacher again.

My point is that, for most schools, it's not a tenable situation to run small classes at the kindergarten level with multiple teachers unless they are charging exorbitant tuition. Now, that's not to say that such schools don't exist. But teachers know that if we are being told, "Hey, you're getting only 12 kids next year and a co-teacher," our first assumption is that we are getting a heavy load of needs.

Again, this isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is a reality.

So, yes, some schools run small K classes as a function of their philosophy. If these are "typical" general ed classes, I would argue that there is more loss than gain in such a situation, but that's just my take. However, to do so, a sacrifice must be made, either by diverting funds from elsewhere or charging higher tuition. Some schools can pull this off, but they are the exception.

[Anonymous]

McLean has 10 - with 2 teachers. Plenty of social interaction during lunches and breaks.

[Anonymous]

How long do they spend on "breaks"? I don't know McLean's program. If it's primarily done through direction instruction and they blend on the playground and during lunch, then I suppose there isn't much lost socially. Then again, if there classroom time is structured in such a way, I wonder on what else they might be missing out on.

Again, I'm not trying to be a negative nancy. Small classrooms are ideal for some kids but, for most, they aren't for a variety of reasons. I'd say 16-18 is an ideal number, with 15-22 still being a high-quality range.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How long do they spend on "breaks"? I don't know McLean's program. If it's primarily done through direction instruction and they blend on the playground and during lunch, then I suppose there isn't much lost socially. Then again, if there classroom time is structured in such a way, I wonder on what else they might be missing out on.

Again, I'm not trying to be a negative nancy. Small classrooms are ideal for some kids but, for most, they aren't for a variety of reasons. I'd say 16-18 is an ideal number, with 15-22 still being a high-quality range.

According to studies, ideal is 12-15 one teacher in K-3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Teacher again.

My point is that, for most schools, it's not a tenable situation to run small classes at the kindergarten level with multiple teachers unless they are charging exorbitant tuition. Now, that's not to say that such schools don't exist. But teachers know that if we are being told, "Hey, you're getting only 12 kids next year and a co-teacher," our first assumption is that we are getting a heavy load of needs.

Again, this isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is a reality.

So, yes, some schools run small K classes as a function of their philosophy. If these are "typical" general ed classes, I would argue that there is more loss than gain in such a situation, but that's just my take. However, to do so, a sacrifice must be made, either by diverting funds from elsewhere or charging higher tuition. Some schools can pull this off, but they are the exception.

OK, I'm going to back away from the idea that a special needs kid will somehow poison the atmosphere for everyone else, because it makes me too angry. What makes you think OP's child doesn't have special needs?

My son goes to McLean and is very social. I have no idea what you are talking about. They actually value socialization and encourage it. I think you must have been assigned a difficult class at some point and so you are projecting.

[Anonymous]

When did I say a special needs kid would "poison the atmosphere? I said nothing of the sort. What I did say is that if you have a class with a high percentage of kids with special needs, then it risks putting a strain on the teacher that makes it harder to meet the needs of ANYONE in the class. I'm not saying to avoid classes which might have kids with special needs; I said the exact opposite, actually, noting that there are benefits to such models. BUT, if a school's primary way of supporting kids with special needs is to shrink class size (which is how many, but certainly not all, approach this situation), then this ultimately is a disservice for all kids in that class in most instances.

And, I also said I know nothing of McLean and probably wrongly jumped at a possible guess at how it work. If I was wrong, I apologize. But just because a school offers lots of time for social interaction, the dynamics that exist in small social groups can often be very limiting. One or two dominant personalities can set the tone for an entire group when it's smaller, whereas larger groups allow different dynamics and groups to exist and interact with one another.

I'm not knocking ANY school out there. What I am saying, from years of experience in independent schools, is that class size and student/teacher ratio are, in absence of other information, very bad measures for assessing a school, despite the way in which they are held in high self-esteem. And, given the scenarios that OFTEN lead to seemingly favorable, the result is often counter to what most parents desire.

I really don't understand the defensiveness. I have no axe to grind here and mean no insult to any parent, child, or school. Rather, I hope to offer advice to parents who might be dealing with schools misrepresenting themselves (and believe me, they ALL do during admissions season). Small class size, besides not being ideal even in the best circumstances, often mean there is something else going on that parents should try to find out before committing to a school.

[Anonymous]

I'm curious about the relevant studies. Any citations you can share?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When did I say a special needs kid would "poison the atmosphere? I said nothing of the sort. What I did say is that if you have a class with a high percentage of kids with special needs, then it risks putting a strain on the teacher that makes it harder to meet the needs of ANYONE in the class. I'm not saying to avoid classes which might have kids with special needs; I said the exact opposite, actually, noting that there are benefits to such models. BUT, if a school's primary way of supporting kids with special needs is to shrink class size (which is how many, but certainly not all, approach this situation), then this ultimately is a disservice for all kids in that class in most instances.

And, I also said I know nothing of McLean and probably wrongly jumped at a possible guess at how it work. If I was wrong, I apologize. But just because a school offers lots of time for social interaction, the dynamics that exist in small social groups can often be very limiting. One or two dominant personalities can set the tone for an entire group when it's smaller, whereas larger groups allow different dynamics and groups to exist and interact with one another.

I'm not knocking ANY school out there. What I am saying, from years of experience in independent schools, is that class size and student/teacher ratio are, in absence of other information, very bad measures for assessing a school, despite the way in which they are held in high self-esteem. And, given the scenarios that OFTEN lead to seemingly favorable, the result is often counter to what most parents desire.

I really don't understand the defensiveness. I have no axe to grind here and mean no insult to any parent, child, or school. Rather, I hope to offer advice to parents who might be dealing with schools misrepresenting themselves (and believe me, they ALL do during admissions season). Small class size, besides not being ideal even in the best circumstances, often mean there is something else going on that parents should try to find out before committing to a school.

I get your point, but small classes are doable. The teachers just have to want to work at it.In many private schools we see the 18 kids two teachers who switch off. Thta to me is laziness, especially when you consier the kids are off at specials or recess for 3 .5 hours a day. Then throw in the half day Fridays. These private school teachers are barely putting in the work of the public school teachers.
The schools could easily have classes of 12-15 with one teacher who works the whole day, with staff left over.

[Anonymous]

When teachers "switch off," the one who is not directing the lesson is not taking a nap. Rather, s/he is writing lesson plans or detailed, individualized report cards, consulting with the librarian about books needed for an upcoming unit, etc., or planning a field trip. If a teacher is in front of a class all day long with no time to prepare, guess what.... there's less preparation and thought involved in the lessons. Coming up with a really terrific unit on the Silk Road, fairy tales, or converting fractions and percentages takes a lot of time. I'm sure you'd complain if the teachers used a canned curriculum!

[Anonymous]

Teacher again.

I don't doubt that one teacher could handle a class of 12-15. Hell, public schools have 25+ and one teacher and an aide. Small is doable. And isn't part of what you pay for in private schools this bit of extra?

FWIW, I lead teach with an assistant, who is fabulous with the kids but otherwise does not contribute behind-the-scenes stuff (not part of of job description). I have a total of 1 hour a week of guaranteed time away from the kids, not accounting for a 30 minute lunch each day. Not every school takes a half day on Fridays or sends their kids out for 3 1/2 hours a day (certainly some do, but at the K level?). If this is what you are paying for, maybe you should reconsider what you're getting for your money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When teachers "switch off," the one who is not directing the lesson is not taking a nap. Rather, s/he is writing lesson plans or detailed, individualized report cards, consulting with the librarian about books needed for an upcoming unit, etc., or planning a field trip. If a teacher is in front of a class all day long with no time to prepare, guess what.... there's less preparation and thought involved in the lessons. Coming up with a really terrific unit on the Silk Road, fairy tales, or converting fractions and percentages takes a lot of time. I'm sure you'd complain if the teachers used a canned curriculum!

OK, but when I do the math, my DC's private school teachers seem to be working nearly HALF the hours of my other child's public school teachers.
I still think that they could trim the budget by forcing more teaching time with less staff or offer smaller classes with the extra teachers.

[Anonymous]

If you are talking about the Mclean School the kindergarten only has 4 boys in it this year. I think that is a little small for socialization.

[Anonymous]

11:02

Well, vote with your wallet. There are schools with pared down teaching staff and lower tuition. If it's really that big a difference, you have the options.

[Anonymous]

Grace Episcopal has 16 students and 2 teachers